<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1995 (12) TMI 192 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86103</link>
    <description>Clearances of a partnership concern may be clubbed with those of a related company where the surrounding circumstances show that the firm lacks real commercial independence and functions as a dummy unit. Here, the partners were closely connected with the company&#039;s controlling persons, independent capital contribution was not established for several partners, retained balances were treated as interest-free loans, and the company supplied raw materials, equipment and financial support while the firm manufactured goods for it. On the cumulative evidence, the partnership was treated as not independent for excise purposes, the clearances were clubbed, and the small-scale exemption was unavailable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:45:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123170" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (12) TMI 192 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86103</link>
      <description>Clearances of a partnership concern may be clubbed with those of a related company where the surrounding circumstances show that the firm lacks real commercial independence and functions as a dummy unit. Here, the partners were closely connected with the company&#039;s controlling persons, independent capital contribution was not established for several partners, retained balances were treated as interest-free loans, and the company supplied raw materials, equipment and financial support while the firm manufactured goods for it. On the cumulative evidence, the partnership was treated as not independent for excise purposes, the clearances were clubbed, and the small-scale exemption was unavailable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86103</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>